Luke the careful historian tells it like it is

nPeace said:

This is not the first time anyone has used that expression, "believe what you want.", and I am not the only one it was said to. It beats me why some people somehow think the same thing is not said to and of them.
It also beats me, why if they don't think it applies to them, why they would think the other person would not think the same.
It's easy enough to point a finger, but it's not that easy proving a valid cause for doing so.

Click to expand...

'Believe what you want' is a fundamental tenet of the legislation and the culture where I live.
You'll probably see it in writing on my posts again.

I didn't realize you had asked about "Mary being pregnant in Herod the Great's lifetime".
I probably didn't notice because I was not paying attention to your complaints, and I explained quite clearly why here.

Click to expand...

Oh No you don't!
You never answered that question back there, or anywhere else.

Now....... How is it that Mary was pregnant in Herod the Great's lifetime, yet still pregnant 10 whole years later during the Roman Census in Judea, Samaria and Idumea?

You've never answered that satisfactorily in your life, methinks.

Have you ever observed two stubborn rams go at it? Each wants to have its own way. One has got to give, isn't that true? Take another look here, and here.
It seems I let you have your way, but not by turning my back to get butted.

Does it seem to make sense to you, to answer a million questions, where the million answers are going to be ignored? Does not make sense to me.

Click to expand...

Go at it? You showed total ignorance by telling me that I should not be in any court. I have written more witness statements and attended court more times than you could ever imagine. Please don't tell me now that you debate in a decent way.
I don't care what you believe. I have come here to learn from other historic Jesus students, and now stay to write about the same.
Believe what you want.

Every challenge you make to the Bible can be shut down with a perfectly reasonable and logical answer.
If you really want that answered, then I think it would be fair to give a little.

Click to expand...

You have never provided an answer to any one point made.


Why did Luke get the date of the last-supper wrong? I guess you didn't even know about that. G-John got it right!

Why was Mary pregnant for ten years?

Why did Joseph and Mary go home to Nazareth and not flee to Egypt?

Just answer those three, then we could move on to many others.

oldbadger said:

'Believe what you want' is a fundamental tenet of the legislation and the culture where I live.
You'll probably see it in writing on my posts again.


Oh No you don't!
You never answered that question back there, or anywhere else.

Now....... How is it that Mary was pregnant in Herod the Great's lifetime, yet still pregnant 10 whole years later during the Roman Census in Judea, Samaria and Idumea?

You've never answered that satisfactorily in your life, methinks.


Go at it? You showed total ignorance by telling me that I should not be in any court. I have written more witness statements and attended court more times than you could ever imagine. Please don't tell me now that you debate in a decent way.
I don't care what you believe. I have come here to learn from other historic Jesus students, and now stay to write about the same.
Believe what you want.



You have never provided an answer to any one point made.


Why did Luke get the date of the last-supper wrong? I guess you didn't even know about that. G-John got it right!

Why was Mary pregnant for ten years?

Why did Joseph and Mary go home to Nazareth and not flee to Egypt?

Just answer those three, then we could move on to many others.

Click to expand...

I would love to hear his answers,

sooda said:

I would love to hear his answers,

Click to expand...

Oh..... it's totally sad ....... Historians do debate fiercely over possibilities etc, but when straight objective evidence is stuffed in front of us we usually acknowledge, even if we contest how it works.

Oh well.....

oldbadger said:

Oh dear....... that old chestnut.

We could start you off with the simple stuff.

Take the migration of the Israelites through the red sea. Do you believe that there is a Red Sea?

Solomon built a huge aTemple on Jerusalem. Do you believe that the ruins of this Temple still exist?

The Baptist redeemed folks in the Jordan River. Do you believe there is a Jordan River?

Best way is to keep things simple, to start.

Click to expand...

Do you believe there is a Kansas?, follow the yellow brick road.

lukethethird said:

Do you believe there is a Kansas?, follow the yellow brick road.

Click to expand...

Yes to Kansas

The thing about miffers is that they cannot bring themselves to admit any simple historical facts from within the books of the Bible.

Miffers just take the whole lot and bung ''em out the door, which is clear indication of what rubbish researchers and investigators they are

Take those hundreds of laws written in the Old Testament, so many which are still laws today in our countries, yet the miffers would say that they never existed, all myths....... where's the intelligence in their mindsets about this kind of thing?

We know that there was a census taken when Herod Archelaus was replaced by a Roman Prefect but the miffers say it's all myth 'cos its in the Bible!

No sense in being a miffer.

oldbadger said:

Yes to Kansas

The thing about miffers is that they cannot bring themselves to admit any simple historical facts from within the books of the Bible.

Miffers just take the whole lot and bung ''em out the door, which is clear indication of what rubbish researchers and investigators they are

Take those hundreds of laws written in the Old Testament, so many which are still laws today in our countries, yet the miffers would say that they never existed, all myths....... where's the intelligence in their mindsets about this kind of thing?

We know that there was a census taken when Herod Archelaus was replaced by a Roman Prefect but the miffers say it's all myth 'cos its in the Bible!

No sense in being a miffer.

Click to expand...

Old testament laws may have been influenced by the Code of Hamurabbi.

When was this Roman census?

sooda said:

Old testament laws may have been influenced by the Code of Hamurabbi.

When was this Roman census?

Click to expand...

Tell us more about the code of Hamurabbi, please.

Roman census in Idumea, Samaria and Judea was in 6CE. Caused a lot of demonstrations and riots.

Herod Archelaus | king of Judaea | Britannica.com
www.britannica.com/biography/Herod-Archelaus
Herod Archelaus: Herod Archelaus, son and principal heir of Herod I the Great as king of Judaea, deposed by Rome because of his unpopularity with the Jews. Named in his father’s will as ruler of the largest part of the Judaean kingdom—Judaea proper, Idumaea, and Samaria—Archelaus went to Rome (4 bc) to defend his....


The "Census of Quirinius" refers to the enrollment of the Roman Provinces of Syria and Iudaea for tax purposes taken in 6/7CE during the reign of the Roman Emperor Augustus, when Publius Sulpicius Quirinius was appointed governor of Syria, after the banishment of Herod Archelaus .

oldbadger said:

Tell us more about the code of Hamurabbi, please.

Roman census in Idumea, Samaria and Judea was in 6CE. Caused a lot of demonstrations and riots.

Click to expand...

1. Code of Hammurabi | Summary & History | Britannica.com
   www.britannica.com/topic/Code-of-Hammurabi
   …on which is inscribed the Code of Hammurabi, who was a Babylonian king of the 18th century bce. This code includes laws relating to the practice of medicine, and the penalties for failure were severe. For example, “If the doctor, in opening an abscess, shall kill the patient, his hands…
   
   
2. The Avalon Project : Code of Hammurabi
   avalon.law.yale.edu/ancient/hamframe.asp
   CODE OF LAWS. 1. If any one ensnare another, putting a ban upon him, but he can not prove it, then he that ensnared him shall be put to death. 2. If any one bring an accusation against a man, and the accused go to the river and leap into the river, if he sink in the river his accuser shall take possession of his house.
   

sooda said:

1. Code of Hammurabi | Summary & History | Britannica.com
   www.britannica.com/topic/Code-of-Hammurabi
   …on which is inscribed the Code of Hammurabi, who was a Babylonian king of the 18th century bce. This code includes laws relating to the practice of medicine, and the penalties for failure were severe. For example, “If the doctor, in opening an abscess, shall kill the patient, his hands…
   
   
2. The Avalon Project : Code of Hammurabi
   avalon.law.yale.edu/ancient/hamframe.asp
   CODE OF LAWS. 1. If any one ensnare another, putting a ban upon him, but he can not prove it, then he that ensnared him shall be put to death. 2. If any one bring an accusation against a man, and the accused go to the river and leap into the river, if he sink in the river his accuser shall take possession of his house.

Click to expand...

The code predates Abraham by 500 years or so..Most scholars think the Jews learned of it during the Babylonian exile and wrote Leviticus and Deuteronomy as a result.

oldbadger said:

Roman census in Idumea, Samaria and Judea was in 6CE. Caused a lot of demonstrations and riots.

Click to expand...

The Census of Quirinius was a census of Judea taken by Publius Sulpicius Quirinius, Roman governor of Syria, upon the imposition of direct Roman rule in 6 CE.[1] The Gospel of Luke uses it as the narrative means to establish the birth of Jesus (Luke 2:1–5), but places it within the reign of Herod the Great, who died 9 years earlier.[2][3][4] No satisfactory explanation of the contradiction seems possible,[5] and most scholars think that the author of the gospel made an error.[6] wiki

There are major difficulties in accepting Luke's account: the gospel links the birth of Jesus to the reign of Herod the Great, but the census took place in 6 CE, nine years after Herod's death in 4 BCE; there was no single census of the entire empire under Augustus; no Roman census required people to travel from their own homes to those of distant ancestors; and the census of Judea would not have affected Joseph and his family, living in Galilee. wiki

So much for Luke the historian.

lukethethird said:

The Census of Quirinius was a census of Judea taken by Publius Sulpicius Quirinius, Roman governor of Syria, upon the imposition of direct Roman rule in 6 CE.[1] The Gospel of Luke uses it as the narrative means to establish the birth of Jesus (Luke 2:1–5), but places it within the reign of Herod the Great, who died 9 years earlier.[2][3][4] No satisfactory explanation of the contradiction seems possible,[5] and most scholars think that the author of the gospel made an error.[6] wiki

There are major difficulties in accepting Luke's account: the gospel links the birth of Jesus to the reign of Herod the Great, but the census took place in 6 CE, nine years after Herod's death in 4 BCE; there was no single census of the entire empire under Augustus; no Roman census required people to travel from their own homes to those of distant ancestors; and the census of Judea would not have affected Joseph and his family, living in Galilee. wiki

Click to expand...

I know.. It makes no sense at all. The only explanation is that the Gospel writers didn't know.

[

sooda said:

I know.. It makes no sense at all. The only explanation is that the Gospel writers didn't know.

Click to expand...

They knew, the thing is they were writing a Christian theology, not history.

lukethethird said:

[

They knew, the thing is they were writing a Christian theology, not history.

Click to expand...

OK.. but they certainly weren't clever about it, were they?

sooda said:

OK.. but they certainly weren't clever about it, were they?

Click to expand...

Regardless, there's no shortage of believers.

lukethethird said:

Regardless, there's no shortage of believers.

Click to expand...

Well, I guess that's OK as long as they don't get nuts and hurt people who disagree with them.

sooda said:

Well, I guess that's OK as long as they don't get nuts and hurt people who disagree with them.

Click to expand...

It's not worth worrying about, to be certain Jesus is historical is as nonsensical as declaring with certainty that Jesus was mythical. The point is that Luke and historian do not belong in the same sentence, we are reading a storied account that is dependent on the Gospel Mark.

sooda said:

1. Code of Hammurabi | Summary & History | Britannica.com
   www.britannica.com/topic/Code-of-Hammurabi
   …on which is inscribed the Code of Hammurabi, who was a Babylonian king of the 18th century bce. This code includes laws relating to the practice of medicine, and the penalties for failure were severe. For example, “If the doctor, in opening an abscess, shall kill the patient, his hands…
   
   
2. The Avalon Project : Code of Hammurabi
   avalon.law.yale.edu/ancient/hamframe.asp
   CODE OF LAWS. 1. If any one ensnare another, putting a ban upon him, but he can not prove it, then he that ensnared him shall be put to death. 2. If any one bring an accusation against a man, and the accused go to the river and leap into the river, if he sink in the river his accuser shall take possession of his house.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the info.......

The examples of those laws as shown do not match with the torat kohanin from which the Leviticus and other laws evolved.

I expect that the Israelite's laws were their own, although, of course, they would have included good ideas and good discoveries in to their own legislation.

If the Code of Hammurabi has close connections with the OT laws, then a good test would be to see if the laws do align throughout.

For instance, see if the following two laws from the Old Testament are present in the Babylon laws:-

Animals that died from sickness may not be eaten (Deut. 14:21)
Single testimony is unacceptable in trials, there must be corroboration. (Ex. 23:7)

lukethethird said:

The Census of Quirinius was a census of Judea taken by Publius Sulpicius Quirinius, Roman governor of Syria, upon the imposition of direct Roman rule in 6 CE.[1] The Gospel of Luke uses it as the narrative means to establish the birth of Jesus (Luke 2:1–5), but places it within the reign of Herod the Great, who died 9 years earlier.[2][3][4] No satisfactory explanation of the contradiction seems possible,[5] and most scholars think that the author of the gospel made an error.[6] wiki

Click to expand...

Very good.
I have already written about this on this thread, so I know that you don't read all the posts.

There are major difficulties in accepting Luke's account: the gospel links the birth of Jesus to the reign of Herod the Great, but the census took place in 6 CE, nine years after Herod's death in 4 BCE; there was no single census of the entire empire under Augustus; no Roman census required people to travel from their own homes to those of distant ancestors; and the census of Judea would not have affected Joseph and his family, living in Galilee. wiki

So much for Luke the historian.

Click to expand...

We have already discussed the above.

You are no investigator, Luke. We have already dismissed Luke's nativity account, even though he tried to assimilate it in to what I call 'Truth Pills' that is, referring to known events in the hope that this would help credence of the whole story.

But if you are a competent historian you can only dismiss that section of the book. All you have to do now is learn more about the rest of the book. Which I don't think that you have.

The Christian story is a 'faith' story which was built upon the lives and missions of a few people, none of them who wanted to discard their own religion, and so some of Luke's anecdotes and incidents are true........... he was using 'Truth Pills' in his story.

Oh......... and since he surely believed in what he was writing, or at least meant his letter to be for the good of its addressee, I don't think that Luke was a bad man.

oldbadger said:

'Believe what you want' is a fundamental tenet of the legislation and the culture where I live.
You'll probably see it in writing on my posts again.


Oh No you don't!
You never answered that question back there, or anywhere else.

Now....... How is it that Mary was pregnant in Herod the Great's lifetime, yet still pregnant 10 whole years later during the Roman Census in Judea, Samaria and Idumea?

You've never answered that satisfactorily in your life, methinks.


Go at it? You showed total ignorance by telling me that I should not be in any court. I have written more witness statements and attended court more times than you could ever imagine. Please don't tell me now that you debate in a decent way.
I don't care what you believe. I have come here to learn from other historic Jesus students, and now stay to write about the same.
Believe what you want.



You have never provided an answer to any one point made.


Why did Luke get the date of the last-supper wrong? I guess you didn't even know about that. G-John got it right!

Why was Mary pregnant for ten years?

Why did Joseph and Mary go home to Nazareth and not flee to Egypt?

Just answer those three, then we could move on to many others.

Click to expand...

Seems as though you aren't reading my posts really. Or perhaps you are not understanding what you read in them. Either one or the other, because your responses don't follow.